论文部分内容阅读
目的:对比病原菌培养阳性脓毒症（CPS）与培养阴性脓毒症（CNS）患者的特征和结局，以了解培养阴性对预后的影响，并探讨其可能的死亡风险因素。方法:采用回顾性队列研究方法，以从美国重症监护医学信息数据库Ⅳv0.4（MIMIC-Ⅳv0.4）中筛选出的脓毒症患者作为研究对象。根据确诊脓毒症前后24 h内病原菌培养结果将患者分为CPS组和CNS组，比较两组患者的一般资料、病情资料及医疗操作等。在3个回归模型下，应用Logistic回归法分析CNS与住院病死率的关系。利用卡方分析及中介效应分析探讨初始抗菌药物治疗和90 d内抗菌药物使用史对CNS患者住院病死率的影响。结果:共8 587例脓毒症患者纳入最终分析，其中CPS组5 483例，CNS组3 104例。与CPS组相比，CNS组患者年龄更小〔岁：68（56，79）比70（58，81）〕，序贯器官衰竭评分（SOFA）及入重症监护病房（ICU）24 h内进行机械通气、肾脏替代治疗和使用血管升压素比例更高〔SOFA评分（分）：3（2，5）比3（2，4），机械通气：48.61%（1 509/3 104）比39.25%（2 152/5 483），肾脏替代治疗：13.69%（425/3 104）比9.68%（531/5 483），血管升压素：15.79%（490/3 104）比13.44%（737/5 483）〕，且ICU住院时间更长〔d：5（3，10）比3（2，6）〕，住院病死率更高〔25.00%（776/3 104）比18.53%（1 016/5 483）〕，差异均有统计学意义（均n P<0.01）；但两组在性别分布、入ICU类型、简化急性生理学评分Ⅱ（SAPSⅡ）、查尔森合并症指数（CCI）评分等方面差异均无统计学意义。经过多种因素校正后，CNS是患者院内死亡的危险因素〔优势比（n OR）＝1.441，95%可信区间（95%n CI）为1.273~1.630，n P<0.001〕。卡方分析及中介效应分析结果显示，初始抗菌药物治疗对CNS患者住院病死率升高没有显著影响，而90 d内抗菌药物使用史是CNS患者院内死亡的危险因素（n OR＝1.683，95%n CI为1.328~2.134，n P<0.05），CNS在90 d内抗菌药物使用史及院内死亡中的中介效应显著（n Z＝5.302，n P<0.001），中介效应占比为7.58%。n 结论:CNS患者较CPS患者病情更重，预后更差。既往90 d内使用过抗菌药物可能与CNS患者住院病死率升高有关，但并不能完全解释CNS高病死率的原因。“,”Objective:To compare the characteristics and outcomes of culture-positive sepsis (CPS) with culture-negative sepsis (CNS) patients in order to understand the impact of CNS on prognosis and explore the possible risk factors for mortality.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with sepsis were identified from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care database-Ⅳ v0.4 (MIMIC-Ⅳ v0.4). Patients were divided into CPS and CNS groups according to the culture results within 24 hours before and after the diagnosis of sepsis. General information, baseline characteristics, and medical operation data between CNS and CPS groups were compared. Logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the relationship between CNS and in-hospital mortality under three regression models. n Chi-square analysis and mediation analysis were used to analyze the effect of initial antibiotic and prior antibiotic use within 90 days on the in-hospital mortality of CNS.n Results:A total of 8 587 patients with sepsis were enrolled in the final analysis, including 5 483 patients in the CPS group and 3 104 patients in the CNS group. Compared with the CPS group, the patients in the CNS group were younger [years old: 68 (56, 79) vs. 70 (58, 81)], had higher sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score and higher proportion of using mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy and vasopressin within 24 hours after intensive care unit (ICU) admission [SOFA score: 3 (2, 5) vs. 3 (2, 4), mechanical ventilation: 48.61% (1 509/3 104) vs. 39.25% (2 152/5 483), renal replacement therapy: 13.69% (425/3 104) vs. 9.68% (531/5 483), vasopressin: 15.79% (490/3 104) vs. 13.44% (737/5 483)], longer length of ICU stay [days: 5 (3, 10) vs. 3 (2, 6)] and higher in-hospital mortality [25.00% (776/3 104) vs. 18.53% (1 016/5 483)], with significant differences (alln P < 0.01). However, there was no significant difference in gender, ICU type, simplified acute physiology score Ⅱ (SAPS Ⅱ), and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) score between the two groups. After adjustment for multiple confounding factors, CNS was still a risk factor for in-hospital mortality [odds ratio ( n OR) = 1.441, 95% confidence interval (95%n CI) was 1.273-1.630, n P < 0.001]. The results of n Chi-square analysis and mediation analysis showed that the initial antibiotic had no significant effect on the higher in-hospital mortality of CNS, while the prior use of antibiotics within 90 days was related to higher in-hospital mortality of CNS (n OR = 1.683, 95%n CI was 1.328-2.134, n P < 0.05). The mediating effect of CNS in prior antibiotic use within 90 days and in-hospital death was significant ( n Z = 5.302, n P < 0.001), accounting for 7.58%.n Conclusions:Compared with CPS, CNS was more severe and had a worse prognosis. Prior use of antibiotics within 90 days may be related to the higher in-hospital mortality of CNS patients, but it could not fully explain the high mortality of CNS.